County invokes state suspension of meetings law

On July 24, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors reaffirmed its commitment to open meetings, unanimously agreeing to follow the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act even though the state had suspended the law to save money.

Supervisor Pam Slater-Price said, “We welcome transparency and we welcome public participation. We’re an open book and we plan to stay that way.”

The county’s lawyers gave another message to a constituent group that tried to hold the county to the Brown Act last month.

Chief Deputy County Counsel Ellen Pilsecker wrote to the San Diegans for Open Government that the county is following the Brown Act — but doesn’t have to.

There is “no legal basis for threatening or bringing a lawsuit for failure to comply with (Government Code) section 54954.2 because that section is no longer operative,” she wrote.

The citizens group was questioning how the board last month voted to replace Chief Administrative Officer Walt Ekard within four hours of his announced resignation — even though the matter was not noticed 72 hours in advance, as is generally required.

The county said it was complying with state open-meetings laws, which allow unannounced actions on an emergency basis. Even though Ekard’s departure won’t take place until Dec. 1, the board decided naming his assistant Helen Robbins-Meyer as his successor was an urgent matter.

Document

For good measure, the county’s lawyers added that the state open records law has been suspended — a state decision that took effect July 1 to save on money it was reimbursing to local governments to cover their costs for making meetings public.

Even under the law, Pilsecker noted in her Aug. 17 letter, county supervisors are not required to accept public comment on closed-session matters.

“The public did not lose any opportunity by virtue of the expedited process,” she said.

Roberts agreed, and said there is no contradiction between the board’s public position in favor of open meetings and the lawyer’s letter noting that the state law has been suspended.

“The board’s action was legal, proper, and in compliance with the Brown Act,” Roberts said. “While the attorney’s letter states correctly that the Brown Act is no longer in effect, it also notes that we are in compliance with this appointment. We intend to continue to comply.”

Given Robbins-Meyer’s qualifications, Roberts added, any public process to find a replacement would have been a sham.

“It would be unfair to other candidates and a waste of taxpayer’s dollars to have a mock interview process,” Roberts said. “Helen is eminently qualified and the board has complete confidence in her ability to assume these duties.”

Attorney Cory Briggs, who represents the open-government group, said it was improper to promote Robbins-Meyer without going through a public process.

“Your haste in appointing a replacement, without first giving the public an opportunity to comment on the matter, constituted a violation of the Brown Act,” he wrote.

Briggs, who sued the county earlier this year on another allegation of violating state law, said he has not yet decided whether to take this case to court.

“The only real urgency, he said, “was making sure a national search didn’t yield a better replacement and completely boxing the public out of the process.”

The Brown Act issue has come up before for the county.

In July, San Diegans for Open Government claimed in a lawsuit that the county neglected to properly inform the public about plans to spend $1.56 million processing zone changes for private property owners. That case is pending in Superior Court.

Late last year, supervisors voted to implement proposals from a panel convened to reduce bureaucracy in the planning department even though the board agenda made no mention of a proposed action.

The government watchdog group Californians Aware sued the county in January and within days the Board of Supervisors vacated its earlier vote. The county issued a statement saying no Brown Act violations occurred.

“Accusations are easy to make,” Roberts said. “They become news even when there is no legal basis.”